From: Scott Chase (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu 17 Oct 2002 - 23:01:43 GMT
>To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
>Subject: Re: electric meme bombs
>Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 00:17:49 -0500
> > On Thursday, October 17, 2002, at 12:04 , Scott Chase wrote:
> > > Wade= externalist beme
> > > You= internalist meme-ory
> > > Pink unicorn= ???
> > You know, the usual variant of the Pink Unicorn is the Invisible Pink
> > Unicorn, so '???' is perhaps the best equation.
> > Of course, neither Joe nor I are exclusively internalist or
> > externalist, we just rock our respective boats in different yaws.
> > I find the identifiability of behavior-only memes to be their chief
> > delight, and the total non-identifiability of internal memes to be
> > their primary sourness. Joe thinks they can and will be found. So,
> > yeah, I think he kind of wants to play with the unicorns, but I don't
> > think he is a virgin, so they won't talk to him.
> > Pink unicorns, visible or invisible, while dramatically allowable, are
> > not within nature to pursue.
> > - Wade
>We haven't popped their equine cherries yet, but, PET-scan-wise, we
>have advanced beond first base, and perhaps to second. and that is all
>that's necessary to establish a base path.
There was some fancy equipment used by the apparition chasers on
"Poltergeist" and "Ghostbusters" too? What's your point in co-opting P.E.T. scanning as support?
Unlimited Internet access for only $21.95/month. Try MSN!
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu 17 Oct 2002 - 23:07:00 GMT